I had to take a step back guys.. Im so emotionally exhausted right now. It is so hard to cope with these people.. I am trying not to harbor hatred in my heart but its so hard. I havent seen the news or anything bc I cant bare to see these white ppl act like we have no right to be angry..

I feel like busting a cap in a few of these bastards..

So if I dont post as much for a few days, its bc I need time to gather myself. I'm filled with so much pain..

I had to take a step back guys.. Im so emotionally exhausted right now. It is so hard to cope with these people.. I am trying not to harbor hatred in my heart but its so hard. I havent seen the news or anything bc I cant bare to see these white ppl act like we have no right to be angry..

I feel like busting a cap in a few of these bastards..

So if I dont post as much for a few days, its bc I need time to gather myself. I'm filled with so much pain..

America The Beautiful

I was in my bedroom. My girlfriend and I were preparing to head to a
friend’s birthday party/cookout. After checking my pockets to make sure I
had my wallet and keys, I reflexively scanned my phone, and saw I had a
message from my boss at EBONY.

“Damon, are you by a computer? Can you put up the NYT report on the verdict ASAP?!”

My Saturday was an uncharacteristically busy one. The birthday party
mentioned above was the fourth social gathering we attended, and there
were three others we wanted to attend but couldn’t slide into our
schedule. Yet, much of my day was spent doing the exact same thing:
checking my phone to see if the Zimmerman verdict came in yet.

When my boss emailed me, it had been a half hour or so since I last
checked, so that email was the first notice I received that the verdict
was in. As you can see, the email didn’t give any indication what the
verdict actually was. But, before logging on to Twitter, I re-read it a
couple times just to see if there were any clues with her syntax and
punctuation that would give me any clues about what I was about to find
out. Basically, I was bracing myself. I was also holding my breath.

It’s Sunday afternoon now. A little after two o’clock. As of yet,
there haven’t been any serious riots or violence in response to the
verdict, and I don’t expect there to be. The anger is there—festering,
smoldering, and blistering—but that feeling is engulfed by a pervasive,
all-encompassing sadness. This is devastating. And, this
devastation—not outrage or violence—is the scariest outcome for
everyone.

Although this feeling is a direct result of learning that George
Zimmerman would not be punished for killing Trayvon Martin, the emotion
behind our collective investment in this case was never about
retribution or revenge. Or even anger and outrage. It was hope. Hope
we’d finally get a sign that our lives matter just as much as their’s
do. Hope that the criminal justice system would finally extend us an
olive branch. Hope that this time—when the prevailing facts of the case
seemed so apparent, so conspicuous—they couldn’t excuse or argue a way
out of finally having to admit that it’s not okay to kill Black people.

While we (Black people) have a reputation for not trusting the
government in general and law enforcement in particular, that sentiment
is misleading. Yes, it’s true that we don’t trust…but we want to.
We want to be able to buy in. We want to be able to say the pledge of
allegiance with the same conviction other American citizens do. We want
to be able to celebrate America without being cynics. We want to be able
to trust the cops, the criminal justice system, our politicians, our
government, and our country. We want to believe that our country
believes in us. We want to sing “America the Beautiful” and actually mean it.

To us, America is the deadbeat dad who always promises he’s going to
make our next baseball game. And, although he never does, it doesn’t
stop us from glancing in the stands between every inning to see if he
finally decided to show up. That’s the thing with us. Regardless of how
many times we’re let down, we’re still holding out hope that he’s going
to come through.

But, after being devastated too many times, you learn that if you
keep holding your breath, waiting for a sign that he cares, you might
never breathe again. Basically, the only way you can keep living is if
you stop giving a .

I’m not there yet. I still have hope. I still want to believe. I’m
still glancing in the stands between innings, waiting to see something I
know I’ll probably never see.

The image of a murder trial jury often times gives the image from 12 Angry Men,
a group holed up, cut off from contact from the outside world, with the
weight of life or death hanging over their heads as they decide the
fate of the person on trial. However, in the case of the Zimmerman
trial, the revelations
are of steak dinners, fancy pedicures and trips to local museums, all
on the taxpayer dime. The decision to pamper the jury was undertaken for
a myriad of reasons. As one Florida attorney, Randy Reep, pointed out:

These women of course are not criminals, yet we took them
from their families. While we did not say this then, now it is clear,
half of the country is going to very vocally find fault with your
dedicated effort. A Bloomin Onion at Outback would not adequately
reimburse these women for the bitterness [some will level at them for
their jury service.]

Jurors watched television and movies, exercised at the
hotel fitness center, and spent weekends being visited by family and
friends.

Hold on a second. The Sheriff’s office did not take them
away from their families, they had access to them over the weekend!
However, they were carefully monitored to prevent jury tampering at
least, right? To verify this statement, AI’s own Dr. Mark Bear contacted them, telling us:

Just verified with Heather Smith, from the Seminole
Country Sheriff’s Office at 407-474-6259. She states, “Generally
speaking, jurors serving on the Zimmerman trial were afforded two hours
of visiting privileges with family of friends each weekend.” I asked
what she meant by generally speaking,” and she states, “there were more
opportunities afforded jurors but not all took advantage.”

So, these visits were unsupervised. WFTV has dug into these visits, and what they found calls into question the verdict. As WFTV’s legal analyst, Bill Sheaffer, points out:

It only takes two seconds for an inappropriate comment to
be made to a juror by a family member inadvertently or otherwise to
possibly affect the verdict, how they look at the case.

The potential book was always intended to be a respectful observation of the trial from my and my husband’s perspectives…

Her husband holding a perspective strong enough to write a book on
the subject, given unsupervised access during the trial to his wife on
the jury. Juror B37 has also admitted that the decision was reached with
information not presented at the trial itself.

This is a siren bell warning of jury tampering. And this is but one
juror, how much was discussed with the other jurors. The failure to
supervise has now resulted in a potential legal nightmare for the state
of Florida, which can be held liable for failing to properly ensure an
untampered jury. Add to it the money that juror B37 could anticipate
from such a book deal, which would be worth far more if given a
not-guilty verdict than otherwise, and we are looking at a potential post-trial jury payoff negotiated through the husband.

And the concerns over Juror B37 are far older than that apparent after the trial. In watching her jury interview, one finds a very concerning pattern.
As discussed by legal expert Gail Brashers-Krug, a former federal
prosecutor and law professor and who is currently a criminal defense
attorney in Iowa:

She really wants to be a juror. She seems to be going out
of her way to minimize the disruptive effect of a multiweek trial on
her life. Jurors rarely do that. She is also taking pains to avoid
saying anything particularly sympathetic to either side. Both sides tend
to be very skeptical of jurors who are particularly eager to serve on
high-profile cases. Often they have their own agendas, or are
attention-seekers.

We find a juror with their own agenda, who managed to sneak her way
onto the jury, with unsupervised access to an element harboring their
own viewpoint and opinion, and who aimed to profit off of a non-guilty
verdict. She had the means, by having access to her husband
unsupervised. She had the motive, by profiting off of a book deal. And
she had the opportunity by being on the jury in the first place.

Her husband holding a perspective strong enough to write a book on the subject, given unsupervised access during the trial to his wife on the jury. Juror B37 has also admitted that the decision was reached with information not presented at the trial itself.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum